Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 15, 2005, 3:32 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 16
Default

Okay ..sooooooooo I dumped the cash and I got a 24-105 a couple days back ..Been testing it against my plasteeeeek wonderkin, $90 18-55 kit lense. Guess what..in all my home-grown tests ..the kit lense kept pace with the super cash flow zoom. I tacked up a sheet of fine print ..planted my 20D on a super delux sturdy tripod and shot away at various settings with both lenses ...RAW. Yes I turned off the image stabilization on the 24-105 when on tripod. The only diff with the two was the 18-55 was less exposed at similar settings..otherwise they both shot very similar at all points on the grid..center /corners and 100% crops ..same .

Now what is bothersome is there is not a real noticeable diff in shooting freely round the yard etc . More often than not the kit lense images were a tick sharper!

I may have too high an expectation of this lense ..but for the cash ,...well so far its nothing to write home about..but then I am super critical. Could it be this 24-105 is great for the zoom of this size or the dreaded ..BADcopy. I don't own any other lower end zooms to compare.

Does one have to print off images to see really what is being captured ? I just viewed the images on a good lcd screen ..Any comments welcome ..
D20nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 15, 2005, 4:44 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 16
Default

Asmall update on my tests of the 24-105.

In a careful review of all I shot I see apositive difference in quality in the 24-105 to the kit lense in great light. There its resolution is sharper the colours crisper. Drop the light and the plasteeek wonder 18-55 seems to catch it.

Is the diff worth 1000 plus clams in price ?

To keep or not to keep this pretty glass..this is the question ...humm.

I'm reviewing da situvation .....I think I'll thinkit out again.


D20nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 6:20 AM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

IMO the 24-105 will shine on a full-frame - With the 20D you can only see a fraction of what this lens can do and for that the kit lens is fine - as most other affordable 'digital' lenses as well
-> The cost is all toward that larger FOV (which you don't seem to need on your cropped dSLR)

The question is do you see a full-frame body in your future or not?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 10:32 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 16
Default

Very good point. I am thinking FF. I am intentionally buying only lenses that are FF capable. I will be upscaling from the 20 D in the future when more affordable FF come along.

It would seem IMHO that the 1.6 cropping would result in better, not worse images than a kit lensewhich even if is optomized for digital ..is tre el cheapo, Also cropping on the 24-105 would seem to be accessing the best part of the lense and therefore the images would be of the sharpest area of the lense. Hence my wonderin..

I must add that this L series deal is truelysomethin else again ... I do not know if I will buy lesser lenses in the future no matter what . This thing is plain sweet in operation and reaks of quality. I am hoping its optical qualities are as good as its other attributes.
D20nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2005, 2:49 PM   #5
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

yes, with the crop factor the 24-105 will be better on a 1.6 camera than a FF body.. but the point is that both lenses will look good on a 1.6 camera.. which is a good thing..

but what you get w/ the 24-105L is good quality across a large zoom range.. its very difficult to produce 4-5x zoom lenses that are of decent optical quality across the range, much easier to make a 3x zoom.. plus, you are getting a 3rd generation image stability system..

and color and contrast..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2005, 7:04 AM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

D20nut wrote:
Quote:
Also cropping on the 24-105 would seem to be accessing the best part of the lense and therefore the images would be of the sharpest area of the lense. Hence my wonderin..
I've been saying this too, but IMO that's not correct

We're using the best part of the projected image on a cropped camera, not the lens - Think about an f/2.8 lens or faster...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2005, 10:45 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 16
Default

sooooo... I presume the point here is the slower lense = less projected resolution due to light issues hence sharper possible results with faster ..more light gathering lenses ??

Whatever ..your point is proven inpractice and wierdly ...not at the same time ..I got my handson a Sony R1 and it kicked butt onmy resolution tests. Gorgeous clarity if you set things up just right. This lense is faster starting at 2.8. So your point is proved ..BUT the kit lense which is slower ..matches its optical performance ..in the center ...all else falls away to a sloppy softness. So I don't know what the heck is going on there ..I am new to this whole deal ..

As a side note I went and took in my 24-105 to the store I bought it at . I told the dealer my kit lense kicked its butt in resolution ...he smiled and told me I must have done something wrong..so we went over all 4 copies of the 24-105 L in the store ..We checked our results with a pro ..who wanderred in ..Conclusion ..all the 24-105 lenses were soft in the center at 35 mm where they are supposed to "rock" .. Salesguy who has been a pro for 20 plus years ..was shocked with what he saw. A 90 buck zoom beats a $1200 one.

Great (but expensive!!) paper wieghts these 24-105 "L "series lenses. Another pro in the store told the sales person to "send em all back" ..Doubt that will happen . People will buy them ..be blown away by the great colour handling etc ..and not be bothered by a little overall softness..but I can't do that ..it drives me crazy ...:sad:
D20nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2005, 5:36 AM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Folks don't seem to remember this anymore, but with split-screen viewfinder on older SLR, 1/2 of the fresnel screen become dark when lenses of f/5.6 or smaller are mounted on an SLR - and this is in the center of the image!
-> The moral of the story is the entire lens surface is used :idea:
... and also why larger aperture lenses provide more defocusing info for the camera to use in its high-precision AF sensor mode
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2005, 7:08 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 16
Default

perhaps you could clarify thata bit ..getting lost in your larger and smaller and defocusing terms and exactly how the whole lense could be used for focusing. I presume you mean this latter point in terms of light gathering capability.:?

Having a real problem now giving back this SonyR1 I am playing with..sheeeesh is it sharp-- as in very very very sharp. Only by takingcropping all the way to the pixel levelchanges the clarity on in focus shots. Like my old olympus 2100UZ.
D20nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2005, 9:42 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 16
Default

Well I take back the sharp sharp comment on the Sony ..its viewer makes it look super sharp ..at actual resolution on a good screen its just sharp
D20nut is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:08 AM.